PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS: FEEDBACK FOR GROWTH USING PERFORMANCE - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS: FEEDBACK FOR GROWTH USING PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS TO EMPOWER LEADERS TO CONTINUE GROWING AND LEAD EFFECTIVELY �

AGENDA  Authorizers, Board Duties and Governance  Different Kinds of Assessments  The 360 Performance Review Process  Growing Leadership Capacity  Steps to Strengthening Leadership Accountability

AUTHORIZERS, BOARD DUTIES and GOVERNANCE  Where does the performance assessment or evaluation of the CEO/Principal fit in?

Authorizers New York City Department of Education New York State Department of Education The State University of New York - SUNY

Authorizers New York City Department of Education* Accountability Framework – Key Questions 1. Is the school an academic success? 2. Is the school effective and well run? 3. Is the school financially viable? Under Essential Question #2: Operational Stability  School has a formal process for evaluating progress against charter goals.  Board has a formalized governance structure including lines of accountability for the board, school leadership and all staff. *2017-18

Authorizers New York State Department of Education Framework  Education Success  Organizational Soundness  Faithfulness to Charter and Law Benchmark 6: Board Oversight and Governance #5. The board utilizes a performance-based evaluation process for evaluating school leadership, itself, partners and providers. *2017

Authorizers The State University of New York – SUNY (2012) The Charter School Performance Framework. Renewal Questions … 1. Is the School an Academic Success? 2. Is the School an Effective, Viable Organization? 3. Is the School Fiscally Sound? 4. If the School’s Charter is Renewed, What are its Plans for the Term of the Next Charter Period, and are they Reasonable, Feasible and Achievable? Benchmark 2D: Board Oversight. The following elements are generally present …  The board regularly evaluates its own performance and that of the school leaders and the management company (if applicable), holding them accountable for student achievement. *2012

Board Duties  Duty of Care – the reasonable care that an ordinarily prudent person would exercise in a like position and under similar circumstances.  Duty of Loyalty – to act in good faith and in a manner that is in the interests of the school rather than one’s own interests or the interests of another person or organization.  Duty of Obedience – an unwavering commitment to the mission and goals of the school, and to ensuring the school is operating in compliance with the law. Sources: Association of Governing Boards & The Bridgespan Group

DIFFERENT KIND OF ASSESSMENTS  Should performance assessments be linked to compensation reviews?  What are some examples of different types of assessments?

Assessments A performance appraisal (also known as a review or evaluation) is a method by which an employee’s work performance is documented and evaluated. Short list of types:  Management by Objective  Behavioral Checklist  Psychological Appraisal  360 Degree Appraisal

Assessments Management by Objective: Using this method of performance appraisal, the Board and the principal agree upon specific and obtainable goals (preferably ‘SMART’ goals) with a set deadline. With this method, the Board can define success and failure easily. Behavioral Appraisal: This assessment measures the principal based on his/her behaviors – what does he/she do at work, what actions does he/she take to fulfill responsibilities and achieve goals. Psychological (Trait Focused) Appraisal: This appraisal method evaluates the the principal’s intellect , emotional stability, analytical skills and other psychological traits. This method makes it easy for the Board to assess if the principal is a ‘good fit’ for the school and its staff.

360 PERFORMANCE REVIEW  PURPOSE – Why?  OBJECTIVES – What?  TIMING – When?  PROCESS – How?  ANALYSIS – Now, what’s next?

360: Purpose  INDIVIDUAL: To promote greater leadership self- awareness and growth  LEADERSHIP TEAM: To promote leadership learning, collaboration and performance accountability  ORGANIZATION: To demonstrate a school’s or institution’s commitment to promoting a ‘culture of feedback’ for constructive growth

360: Objectives  To clarify leadership strengths  To reveal blind spots and areas for improvement  To identify gaps between expectations and performance

360: Objectives  To assess alignment between:  Words & Deeds  Values & Behaviors  Self-awareness & External Perceptions  Strategic Priorities & Tactical Plans  Organizational Lifecycle & Leadership Evolution  To support leadership growth

360: Timing  To determine if a 360 review process would provide value to the individual, the team and the organization, consider the following:  Is the leader new to the organization? Is it too soon?  Has the organization recently experienced a major restructuring or transitional overhaul?  Is there a toxic or negative-morale problem that is pervasive throughout the school or institution?  If a 360 performance review was used previously, how was the process experienced within the organization?  Does the school have the resources (managerial time and funds) to develop and institutionalize a customized 360?

360: Process  Preparation  Participants  Tools  Implementation  Analysis & Follow up

360: Process ~ Preparation  To establish context and ‘take a snapshot’ of the school’s current reality, review and assess the following :  A school’s current position in its lifecycle  The school’s mission/values/aspirations  The school’s goals & metrics – for both the school and for the leader – and progress to date

360: Process ~ Preparation  To better understand the challenges, expectations and perceptions the school and its leaders are facing and/or hold, interview the following prior to starting the development of the tools (list assumes the beneficiary is the CEO/Principal/Head of School):  Board Chair, Executive Committee or Board-designated Agent  CEO/Principal/Head of School  Optional: Representative of the Authorizing Body  Optional: Representative of Majority Donor/Funder  Optional: Senior-level School Leaders

360: Process ~ Participants  List of participants invited to engage in the 360 review process are agreed upon by the beneficiary and the supervising authority (e.g. CMO’s CEO, Board Chair, etc.).  Participants, or raters, selected typically include the following:  “Self” (Beneficiary of the 360 Review)  Board of Directors  Supervisor (if not the Board’s role)  Direct Reports  Indirect Reports  Parents  External Stakeholders (e.g. Donors, Community Leaders, etc.)

360: Process ~ Participants BOARD OF DIRECTORS SUPERVISOR DIRECT REPORTS SELF: Principal/CEO/Head of School/Senior Executive PARENTS/COMMUNITY/EXTE INDIRECT REPORTS RNAL STAKEBHOLDERS

360: Process ~ Tools  To invite candid, anonymous feedback about a leader’s performance, skills and behaviors , surveys include questions and content customized to each category of participants.  The exception is the self-assessment survey tool , which includes segments representing every category of participants.  The type of the actual survey tool is determined by the participants’ preferred technology. (i.e. Word Document, Excel, SurveyMonkey.)

360: Process ~ Tools  Example of Survey Rating Scale  5 - Role Model : Leader demonstrates extraordinary skill and/or fulfills a responsibility in an excellent manner without exception. Considered in top 5% of comparable leaders.  4 - Exceptional: Leader consistently exceeds expectations and is an exemplar for meeting this standard and/or fulfilling this responsibility. Considered in top 15% of comparable leaders.  3 - Proficient: Leader meets expectations most of the time and is solid in meeting this standard and/or fulfilling this responsibility.  2 - Building: Leader meets this standard and/or fulfills this responsibility some of the time but does so inconsistently.  1 - Needs Development: Leader does not meet expectations for meeting this standard and/or fulfilling this responsibility. Professional coaching and development is needed to address this capacity challenge.

360: Process ~ Tools  Examples of Survey Content Rated  Self-confident: Knows when to lead, when to manage and when to get out of the way.  Accountable: Receives constructive input and/or feedback regarding his/her behavior or decisions with an open mind.  Resilient: Demonstrates the ability to cope effectively with setbacks and move forward in a positive manner.  Adaptability: Demonstrates agility in his/her ability to change course when new information or unexpected circumstances warrant such a change.